Partly allowed

Niranjan S/O Saheblal Dhundale (in Jail) v. the State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Saoner, Nagpur

Bombay HC25 Apr 2014APPA/206/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court criminal appeal is an interim bail order. The appellant, convicted of murder (Section 304 Part-I IPC) on evidence from two initially unhelpful witnesses recalled later, was granted bail despite the serious charge due to the existence of an arguable case.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed in Rs. 35,000 with one solvent surety; substantive sentence suspended pending appeal; matter listed for final hearing.

Niranjan S/O Saheblal Dhundale (in Jail) Vs the… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

1 appa206.14

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

¶3

NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.206 OF 2014 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.83 OF 2014

¶6

(Niranjan s/o Saheblal Dhundale ..vs.. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS Saoner, District Nagpur)

¶7

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

¶9

Shri R.M. Daga, Advocate for the applicant/appellant, Shri S.M. Bhagde, Addl.P.P. for the non-applicant/respondent.

¶10

CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : 25-04-2014

¶11

Heard learned Counsel Shri R.M. Daga for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri S.M. Bhagde for the non-applicant.

¶12

The applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-I of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years. The conviction is mainly based on evidence of two witnesses who initially did not support the prosecution case. They were examined and discharged. They were recalled on the application made by mother of the deceased. Their fresh evidence supports the prosecution case.

¶13

During the course of hearing of appeal, it will have to be examined as to how much weightage can be attached to such type of evidence. Since the applicant has arguable case, the application for grant of bail is allowed.

¶14

2 appa206.14

¶15

The applicant be released on bail in the sum of Rs.35,000/- (rupees thirty five thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount.

¶16

Substantive sentence imposed on the applicant shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal.

¶17

Criminal Appeal No.83 of 2014 .

¶18

The appeal be listed for final hearing in the week commencing from 23-6-2014.

¶19

JUDGE

¶20

pma

Niranjan S/O Saheblal Dhundale (in Jail) v. the State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Saoner, Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niranjan S/O Saheblal Dhundale (in Jail) v. the State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Saoner, Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhwant Singh Lakhwinder Singh Khokar Vs Sainath Urban Credit Co-Op. Soci. Ltd. Thr. P.O.A. Holder, Shriram G. Shivankar and Dilip D.Paonika

M/S St. Marys Syndicate, through Its Prop. Patrick Dhanraj A.I. Rajoo Vs Jagdamba Movers Thr. Its Prop., Kamal Kumar Jajoo Hanuman Prasad Jajoo

Smt. Sitabai Wd/O Rafiq Chaudhari (in Jail) Vs State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Buldana (Rural)

Sachin S/O Sudhakarrao Jambhekar Vs Sonali W/O Sachin Jambhekar and Another

Raju @ Rajaram Bakaram Bharre (in Jail) Vs the State of Maharashtra, through the P.S.O. Andhalgaon P.S. Bhandara

Samsher Khan S/O Yakub Khan Vs Subhash S/O Kanhyaialalji Zanjri